I have ordered a few things from http://www.buildasign.com
Paul Kern (RIS)
605.367.7594
-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Frank Bulk
Sent: Monday, May 07, 2012 5:33 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN
With no intent to open a conversational can 'o worms, I'm curious if anyone is
running a 4-channel plan on their production WLANs, that is willing to share
their opinions and experiences on the topic.
Thanks-
Lee
Lee H. Badman
Wireless/Network Engineer, ITS
Adjunct Instructor, iSchool
Syracuse
I'm interested in any real-world results as well.
Thanks,
Brian
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Lee H Badman
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2012 10:34 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: 4-channels in
I've been using 4 channels in the 2.4GHz for years. I've seen and
tested heavily when we first switched to that idea, but since then
I've more advanced RF technologies and other research that has shown
that 1, 6, 11, and 1 in the same area is better than 4 unique
channel
We ran a 4 channel plan for a couple years on our aruba system. Very
dense ap deployment, lots of interference (necessary evil for the # of
users and solid construction of buildings). Worked fine till we swapped
to code 3.x.x.x, we were told that the ARM features all were tuned for
the 3 channel pl
Good morning -
I can't speak for our on campus network, as that is all managed by wireless
lan controllers. But I can speak about a different experience -
As a consultant for NANOG, we would set up wireless networks in conference
centers across the country. The wireless space would be pretty sa
Lee,
Univ. of TN Knoxville still runs 4 channels (1-4-8-11) and has been doing so
since 2000!
This said, we had a long discussion with Aruba Networks engineers about 3 VS 4
and they mentioned that
their algorithms are better tuned for 3 channels (I suspect that it is the case
for most vendors t
With the 3 channel system rouges are less likely to cause issues I'd think.
A rouge is likely to use 1 6 or 11 as that is the standard. If you have a 4
channel system a rouge is going to be a huge problem where it is only an
annoyance in a 3 channel system. I have found that co-channel interferen
Our pilot deployment included four APs in a single fairly-small building.
If I recall correctly, I put the two in the middle of the building on
channels 1 and 11, with the two further out, one on ch8 (nearest the AP on
ch1) and one on ch4 (nearest the AP on ch11). I'm pretty sure these were
only
I looked into this about 18 months ago for our campus. It never made it to
the point of a trial: I learned enough to stop the project before it made
it that far, and I think I can summarize here what I found.
I'll start by going back to basics: we all know that wireless channels
overlap. A graph o
On May 8, 2012, at 3:00 PM, Coehoorn, Joel wrote:
The short answer is "no". It comes down to the skirts again. Most low-end tools
to measure wireless coverage do a poor job of showing this, but my
understanding is that wifi RF is such that the skirts "flare out" quickly, and
you have nearly al
Phillippe, this is something I would **love** to be shown to be wrong
about.
I think all of us could benefit from a 4th channel (I know I would), if it
comes with clear guidelines for when and how to use it in a way that will
increase rather than decrease throughput. Right now, the best guidelines
I believe Ruckus is working on something called ChannelFly that will utilize
more than the standard 1, 6, and 11 2.4Ghz channels.
Fyi,
Brian
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Hanset, Philippe C
Sent: Tuesday, M
Cisco has a paper on this with some graphs showing "energy overlap" on
4 channel deployments for both 802.11b and 802.11g. The 802.11g OFDM
signal seemed more prone to interference in a 4 channel setup so we
stuck with 1,6,11.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/wireless/technology/channel/depl
Joel,
You last comment hit the nail on the head. We have been advising clients
to migrate to 5.8 Ghz ASAP for years. 2.4 Ghz is a garbage band and all
the rogues make it impossible to gain any density and throughput. While
you may be adhering to 1-6-11, the rogues may not be, and many enterpris
15 matches
Mail list logo
